Search

In this paper the author analyses the possibility of 'creating' a European political people and forming a European political identity and a European political community. In the first, theoretical part of the paper, the author defines two concepts of people -- demos and ethnos -- and describes problems in identity building on purely political grounds of people as demos. By examining the references on a European political people in the EU legal foundations, the author illustrates dual premises of legitimacy for the Union and the Union's identity referents which are generally of a universalist nature. In the second, empirical part of the paper, the author presents how the European identity is formed, in line with classic distinction between 'civic' and 'ethnic' identity. Since the Eurobarometer survey showed a low level of European identification of EU member states' citizens, the author presents concepts which aim to overcome the low level of European afiliation. In the final part of the paper the question which is examined is whether the existence of a European political people is necessary for the future of the European integration. To this end, the author uses various theoretical approaches to the 'creation' of a European political people: economic/market approach, communitarian/ statist approach, 'constitutional patriotism' of Habermas, Weiler's 'multiple demoi' and pluralism/particularism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Today, political leaders throughout Europe are facing a real paradox. On the one hand, Europeans want them to find solutions to the major problems confronting our societies. On the other hand, people increasingly distrust institutions and politics or are simply not interested in them. The problem is acknowledged by national parliaments and governments alike. It is particularly acute at the level of the European Union. Many people are losing confidence in a poorly understood and complex system to deliver the policies that they want. The Union is often seen as remote and at the same time too intrusive. The Irish ‘no’ highlights the impact of these problems on many people. This was reflected not only in the final outcome of the referendum, but also in the low turnout and quality of the debate which preceded it. Yet people also expect the Union to take the lead in seizing the opportunities of globalisation for economic and human development, and in responding to environmental challenges, unemployment, concerns over food safety, crime and regional conflicts. They expect the Union to act as visibly as national governments. Democratic institutions and the representatives of the people, at both national and European levels, can and must try to connect Europe with its citizens. This is the starting condition for more effective and relevant policies. The Commission identified the reform of European governance as one of its four strategic objectives in early 2000. Political developments since then have highlighted that the Union faces a double challenge: there is not only a need for urgent action to adapt governance under the existing treaties, but also for a broader debate on the future of Europe. The White Paper proposes opening up the policy-making process to get more people and organisations involved in shaping and delivering ELI policy. It promotes greater openness, accountability and responsibility for all those involved. This should help people to see how Member States, by acting together within the Union, are able to tackle their concerns more effectively. Having been passed in July 2001, this document attracted comments by many participants within public consultations, and the realisation of the principles laid down in it was one of the four crucial determinants of the European Commission activity in the period between 2000 and 2004. The White Paper on European Governance represents one of the foundations of the contemporary development of the European governance models, which is the reason why we are publishing its translation here. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The processes of Europeization have invaded the public policy sphere and introduced into it, among other things, the altered views of the roles of policy players and their relationships in the processes of the formation and the implementation of public policy. As soon as these new developments had been detected, numerous political science debates understandably ensued about the changed roles and competences of the actors who operate at different political levels in the European Union. The paper begins with the definition of the policy actor in the research of the EU policy process. The usability of the traditional and the contemporary understanding of the policy actor in the EU policy system is looked into by means of the indicators of (non)statehood and the existing view of the role of the state, thereby articulating the dilemmas and the prospects for the potential new taxonomies of policy actors that might emerge as a consequence of the policy activity at the EU level, since the newly identified features breed suspicion in the unequivocal adequacy of the existing taxonomy of the actors. Also, the appropriateness of the categorization of the players according to their political level or to the structuralfunctional character of their activities is discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper is about the analysis of the general structure and the coherence of the historical consciousness of young people in five groups of European countries, using the results of the international study Youth and History of 1995. The analysis suggests there are two main patterns of historical thinking and the construction of historicopolitical identity that the author calls the driving force of historical progressivism and the smelting-plant of patriotism. These modernist schemes of thought, grounded in the competing perceptions of the nation, democracy and Europe, make the historical consciousness ambivalent. Regarding the coherence of historical consciousness, it is somewhat lower in the countries of Eastern Europe, which can be explained by the impact of the "neuralgic spot" of the collapse of socialism and the discontinuity in social, political and cultural aspects as expressed in the ideological cleavages of that time. In the postsocialist Central-European countries on the other hand, this coherence is the highest, the fact that the author attributes to the radical shift from the ideology of socialism and the domination of the cleavage traditionalism--Occidentalism [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ages ago, Plato understood justice as the purport and the essential purpose of the very existence of the state. Though Plato distinguishes between the political justice of the state and the personal justice of the individual soul, it was Aristotle who in his practical philosophy developed, apart from the general justice, an appropriate understanding of the special or particular justice and its significance for social progress. The first part of this paper deals with the different types of justice, and the second with civil society. In order to understand the contemporary theories of political justice and the roles of civil society in its realization, the author looks into the history of the European political thought and "civil society", since "civic" or "civil society" ("societas civilis"), was originally a political society. In modernity, Hegel began differentiating between the state as a political community and the "civil society" as a non-political society; his intention was not to separate but to integrate them by means of the public scrutiny and the citizens' governance. Thus Hegel linked Locke's and Montesquieu's opposing definitions of the relationship between the civil society and the state. This is all the more important since Hegel's philosophy is often misinterpreted as the state totalitarianism since we overlook the dangers coming, especially today, both from the civil society reduced to economy and the absolute state, the dangers that Hegel, with his concept of customariness, detected and avoided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Yearbook of the Faculty of Political Sciences / Godisnjak Fakultet Politickih Nauka Beograd is the property of University of Belgrade, Faculty of Political Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Collected Papers of Zagreb Law Faculty / Zbornik Pravnog Fakulteta u Zagrebu is the property of Sveuciliste u Zagrebu, Pravni Fakultet and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)